quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby lol, you seem to have an inflated faith in human efficiency. don't worry, it's cute.

honestly tho, how hard could it have been? theres only so many around him at his time of death. surely it couldnt have been that hard?

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN honestly tho, how hard could it have been? theres only so many around him at his time of death. surely it couldnt have been that hard?

true.

A friend of mine who was out in iraq got an honorable discharge and they gave him 50 grand cash in the pocket. As long as he didn't ever say what happened over there.

I'm not sure, even an inkling, to this day why they would give him 50 grand and tell him to keep his mouth shut... but maybe he shot tillman in the face.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby true. A friend of mine who was out in iraq got an honorable discharge and they gave him 50 grand cash in the pocket. As long as he didn't ever say what happened over there. I'm not sure, even an inkling, to this day why they would give him 50 grand and tell him to keep his mouth shut... but maybe he shot tillman in the face.

thats horseshit...or at the very least you're are grossly misunderstanding something.

the military doesn't have to bribe individuals with cash to keep their mouths shut about classified crap. they threaten jailtime instead.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN excuse my ignorance, but couldn't ballistics tell who shot tillman and then we'd have someone to question regarding his death?

so, whats your answer to my question Q5. you have the experience in this kind of stuff

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN so, whats your answer to my question Q5. you have the experience in this kind of stuff

no i don't. i do know that you need bullets in order to determine ballistics conclusively. as far as i know there are none. the bullets are long gone.

however, hasn't it been established that they were 5.56mm rounds fired at close proximity?

the question then becomes, how close exactly? that would narrow speculation between malice (murder) and friendly fire (manslaughter). that aspect can be determined roughly without ballistics.

it then becomes a question of testimony and corroberation and who do you believe.

the Army obviously believed one scenario over another based on eyewitness testimony. reasons escape me as to why the Army would go risk so much, so openly and so far as to protect one shooter from murder charges over Pat Tillman if indeed they found him to be murdered on that battlefield

think about it. if the Army knew he was murdered, what do you think the Army would cop to first? something they could control like a friendly fire incident or something they couldn't control like a random beef on the battlefield resulting in murder?

pretty clear to me.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo no i don't. i do know that you need bullets in order to determine ballistics conclusively. as far as i know there are none. the bullets are long gone. however, hasn't it been established that they were 5.56mm rounds fired at close proximity? the question then becomes, how close exactly? that would narrow speculation between malice (murder) and friendly fire (manslaughter). that aspect can be determined roughly without ballistics. it then becomes a question of testimony and corroberation and who do you believe. the Army obviously believed one scenario over another based on eyewitness testimony. reasons escape me as to why the Army would go risk so much, so openly and so far as to protect one shooter from murder charges over Pat Tillman if indeed they found him to be murdered on that battlefield think about it. if the Army knew he was murdered, what do you think the Army would cop to first? something they could control like a friendly fire incident or something they couldn't control like a random beef on the battlefield resulting in murder? pretty clear to me.

Mid-2004...

Anything is possible, its all just speculation. Perhaps he was seen as a perfect hero to galvanize the people into the war movement, and his death was mandated?

Can't really know for sure. :shrug:

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby Mid-2004... Anything is possible, its all just speculation. Perhaps he was seen as a perfect hero to galvanize the people into the war movement, and his death was mandated? Can't really know for sure. :shrug:

alright. well, thats enough from you then

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo alright. well, thats enough from you then

yeah, seriously shibby. that's just nonsense.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN yeah, seriously shibby. that's just nonsense.

Sorry! Crazy me and my crazy theories.

Uhhh why are we dodging the real issue here? Who gives a fuck whether Tillman was killed by legitimate friendly fire or murder? The real issue is that we have an executive branch that is covering up their role in the entire affair:

quote:

[T]he Committee wrote to White House Counsel Fred Fielding seeking 'all documents received or generated by any official in the Executive Office of the President' relating to Corporal Tillman's death," noted a press release from the Committee. But the White House has apparently again invoked its executive privilege to hold up the documents sought by Waxman and Ranking Minority member Tom Davis (R-VA). "The White House Counsel's office responded that it would not provide the Committee with documents that 'implicate Executive Branch confidentiality interests' and produced only two communications with the officials in the Defense Department, one of which was a package of news clippings," the Committe noted. "The response of the Defense Department to the Committee's inquiry was also deficient."

Ummm excuse me but is the white house so intricately involved in the deaths of every other American serviceman? Or is the whitehouse deliberately misleading the american public by falsifying the facts??? WHY THE NEED FOR EXECUTIVE PRIVILEDGE???

___________________
Retro ...

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Uhhh why are we dodging the real issue here? Who gives a fuck whether Tillman was killed by legitimate friendly fire or murder? The real issue is that we have an executive branch that is covering up their role in the entire affair: Ummm excuse me but is the white house so intricately involved in the deaths of every other American serviceman? Or is the whitehouse deliberately misleading the american public by falsifying the facts??? WHY THE NEED FOR EXECUTIVE PRIVILEDGE???

because everyone involved has testified under oath more than enough times in the seven investigations regarding this matter.

Kessinger did everything he could, including lie, to make sure it did not get above him.

Executive Priviledge is NOT the real issue here.

if you can't implicate the top man (Rumsfeld) then there is no need to pursue violating executive priviledge other than to put the President in a position to refuse it and subsequently embarass him. which is exactly what Waxman is doing.